Engineering Design and Development - Portfolio Checklist

This document presents recommended portfolio artifacts that should be captured as you progress through your design project. It is intended to support the scoring rubric by listing specific items and content you may wish to provide anyone who is reviewing your project.

ELEMENT A - Presentation and Justification of the Problem

“The problem is clearly and objectively identified and defined with considerable depth, and it is well elaborated with specific detail; the justification of the problem highlights the concerns of many primary stakeholders and is based on comprehensive, timely, and consistently credible sources; it offers consistently objective detail from which multiple measurable design requirements can be determined.”

Did you offer the reviewers of this portfolio;

A clear and concise problem statement that offers cause and effect phrasing and includes some level of data or statistics about the severity of the problem?
Sufficient and timely evidence supporting that the problem identified is indeed a problem worth solving. Does the benefit of a possible solution justify the effort when weighed against need?
A researched and documented determination of what any solution to the problem defined should be able to do and leads toward measurable design requirements?
Evidence of why you chose your sources?
Written context to all artifacts presented that provides the reviewer a full understanding of the related work?

ELEMENT B - Documentation and Analysis of Prior Solution Attempts

“Documentation of plausible prior attempts to solve the problem and/or related problems is drawn from a wide array of clearly identified and consistently credible sources; the analysis of past and current attempts to solve the problem—including both strengths and shortcomings—is consistently clear, detailed, and supported by relevant data.”

Did you offer the reviewers of this portfolio;

Evidence of a systematic and thoroughly documented search to identify and disclose all plausible prior solution attempts to solve the problem?
Stakeholder evidence and explanation of why prior solution attempts were not effective?
Stakeholder evidence and explanation of what attributes from prior solution attempts were effective?
Documentation that your search and analysis came from a wide array of clearly identified and consistently credible sources?
Written context to all artifacts presented that provides the reviewer a full understanding of the related work?

ELEMENT C - Presentation and Justification of Solution Design Requirements

“Design requirements are listed and prioritized, and they are consistently clear and detailed; these design requirements presented are consistently objective, measurable, and they would be highly likely to lead to a tangible and viable solution to the problem identified; there is evidence that requirements represent the needs of, and have been validated by, many if not all primary stakeholder groups.”

Did you offer the reviewers of this portfolio;

Prioritized design requirements that are objective, measurable, and clearly defined minimum pass /fail values?
Evidence that the defined design requirements will likely lead to a tangible and viable solution attempt?
Evidence that the defined design requirements have been validated by all primary stakeholders?
Written context to all artifacts presented that provides the reviewer a full understanding of the related work?

ELEMENT D - Design Concept Generation, Analysis, and Selection

“The process for generating and comparing possible design solutions was comprehensive, iterative, and consistently defensible, making a viable and well-justified design highly likely; the design solution ultimately chosen was well-justified and demonstrated attention to all design requirements; the plan of action has considerable merit and would easily support repetition and testing for effectiveness by others.”

Did you offer the reviewers of this portfolio;

Evidence of a defensible process by which multiple design solutions were explored?

Evidence that all ideas were aimed at the prioritized list of design requirements listed?
Evidence that consideration was given that the design be reproducible so that it may be tested for effectiveness by others?
Written context to all artifacts presented that provides the reviewer a full understanding of the related work?

ELEMENT E - Application of STEM Principles and Practices

“The proposed solution is well-substantiated with STEM principles and practices applicable to all or nearly all design requirements and functional claims; there is substantial evidence that the application of those principles and practices by the student or a suitable alternate has been reviewed by two or more experts (qualified consultants and/or project mentors) and that those reviews provide confirmation (verification) or detail necessary to inform a corrective response.”

Did you offer the reviewers of this portfolio;

Evidence that design decisions were informed ones, based on sound principles and calculations. That design decisions were not simply best guesses or suggested trial and error testing?
Evidence that testing decisions and analysis were informed ones, based on sound principles and calculations. That testing decisions were not simply best guesses or suggested trial and error testing?
Evidence that at least two other sources reviewed the principals and practices you based your decisions upon?
Written context to all artifacts presented that provides the reviewer a full understanding of the related work?

ELEMENT F - Consideration of Design Viability

The proposed design was carefully reviewed based on several relevant extra-functional considerations; a judgment about design viability based on those considerations—the capacity of the proposed solution to address the problem—is clearly realistic and well supported with credible evidence.

Did you offer the reviewers of this portfolio;

A prioritized list of obstacles to getting the solution design into actual use, supported by end user review?
Evidence that the obstacles can be addressed in a realistic and sustainable way, supported by end user review?
Written context to all artifacts presented that provides the reviewer a full understanding of the related work?

ELEMENT G - Construction of a Testable Prototype

“The final prototype iteration is clearly and fully explained and is constructed with enough detail to assure that objective data on all or nearly all design requirements could be determined; all attributes (sub-systems) of the unique solution that can be tested or modeled mathematically are addressed and a well-supported justification is provided for those that cannot be tested or modeled mathematically and thus require expert review”

Did you offer the reviewers of this portfolio;

A clear and comprehensive description of the final prototype design?
Evidence of how the prototype design or sub systems can be tested or modeled mathematically for each of the measurable design requirements listed in Element C?
Justification for the attributes that cannot be tested or modeled mathematically?
Evidence that these attributes that cannot be tested or modeled mathematically have been reviewed by experts?
Written context to all artifacts presented that provides the reviewer a full understanding of the related work?

ELEMENT H - Prototype Testing and Data Collection Plan

The testing plan addresses all or nearly all of the high priority design requirements by effectively describing the conduct (through physical and/or mathematical modeling) of those tests that are feasible based on the instructional context and providing for others a logical and well-developed explanation confirmed by one or more field experts of how testing would yield objective data regarding the effectiveness of the design.

Did you offer the reviewers of this portfolio;

Evidence that the testing plan addresses each of the design requirements listed?
Evidence that the testing plan focuses on gaining objective and measurable testing data from the highest priority items on the design requirements list?
Written context to all artifacts presented that provides the reviewer a full understanding of the related work?

ELEMENT I - Testing, Data Collection and Analysis

Through the conduct of several tests for high priority requirements that are reasonable based on instructional contexts, or through physical or mathematical modeling, the student demonstrates considerable understanding of testing procedure, including the gathering and analysis of resultant data; the analysis of the effectiveness with which the design met stated goals includes a consistently detailed explanation [and summary] of the data from each portion of the testing procedure and from expert reviews, generously supported by pictures, graphs, charts and other visuals; the analysis includes an overall summary of the implications of all data for proceeding with the design and solving the problem.

Did you offer the reviewers of this portfolio;

Evidence that several quantitative tests for high priority requirements were created?
Demonstration of understanding of the testing procedures including;

gathering and analysis of resultant data?
the analysis of the effectiveness with which the design met stated goals of the design requirements?
a consistently detailed explanation and summary of the data from each portion of the testing procedure?
the analysis and overall summary of the implications of all data?
expert review that validates the tests performed and the analysis process of those tests?
use of pictures, graphs, charts and other visuals?

Written context to all artifacts presented that provides the reviewer a full understanding of the related work?

ELEMENT J - Documentation of External Evaluation

Documentation of project evaluation by multiple, demonstrably qualified stakeholders and field experts is presented and is synthesized in a consistently specific, detailed, and thorough way; documentation is sufficient in two or more categories to yield meaningful analysis of that evaluation data; the synthesis of evaluations consistently addresses evaluators’ specific questions, concerns, and opinions related to design requirements.

Did you offer the reviewers of this portfolio;

Documentation of a detailed design review by multiple, demonstrably qualified stakeholders and field experts?
Justification about how well the results have met the design requirements and goals of the project?
Written context to all artifacts presented that provides the reviewer a full understanding of the related work?

ELEMENT K - Reflection on the Design Project

“The project designer provides a consistently clear, insightful, and comprehensive reflection on, and value judgment of, each major step in the project; the reflection includes a substantive summary of lessons learned that would be clearly useful to others attempting the same or similar project.”

Did you offer the reviewers of this portfolio;

Prioritized recommendations to others redoing this project where you would suggest more focus and effort?
Justification why these recommendations might have led to a better results for you or your team?
Written context to all artifacts presented that provides the reviewer a full understanding of the related work?

ELEMENT L - Presentation of Designer’s Recommendations

“The project designer includes consistently detailed and salient recommendations regarding the conduct of the same or similar project in the future; recommendations include caveats as warranted and specific ways the project could be improved with consistently detailed plans for the implementation of those improvements.”

Did you offer the reviewers of this portfolio;

Recommendations regarding the conduct of the same or similar project in the future should someone choose to continue your work?
Recommendations on how the project could be improved with consistently detailed plans for the implementation of those improvements?
Written context to all artifacts presented that provides the reviewer a full understanding of the related work?

Porfolio Checklist.docx Download Porfolio Checklist.docx